The Grammys Confirm that Rock is (nearly) Dead
Now and Then… and Apparently Forever
I didn't watch the Grammys. Award shows aren’t my thing. But I’ve seen the winners splashed across social media, and while it's easy to dismiss the results as inconsequential, they do offer a glimpse into where mainstream music is headed—or at least where the industry is willing and unwilling to invest its attention.
And, surprise-surprise: rock music is on its last breath.
This year's rock category nominations felt more like an exercise in nostalgia than a reflection of the genre today. Yes, there were nods to Fontaines D.C. and Idles—two bands still defining their sound rather than reasserting their legacy—but did they ever stand a real chance of winning? Or were they just there to make the category seem more current than a throwback playlist?
While pop, hip-hop, country, and even electronic music continue to push forward, rock is honored less for its evolution than for its lore. To the masses, the genre has become more of a symbolic category than a relevant one, a nostalgic gesture rather than a celebration of something alive and growing. Which makes sense if you define the genre with the nominees the Academy put forward: dad rock, grandpa rock, Rigs of Dad?
The Rolling Stones won Best Rock Album, and The Beatles took home Best Rock Performance. You know, the same two bands that defined rock music before we even landed on the moon. Don't get me wrong, I love The Stones. When I saw them last year, their live show blew away nearly every modern rock band I've seen. But when the most celebrated rock musicians in 2024 are still the same ones who had to dodge screaming teenage girls in the 1960s, it raises a question: Is rock music an evolving art form, or has it become a museum exhibit?
The Beatles' win for Now and Then—a track pieced together from an old John Lennon demo and finished with AI production assistance—was the final nail in the coffin. Nothing says rebellious rock spirit like Peter Jackson stepping in as the fifth Beatle.
But really, what does it say about the state of rock music when the "best" rock performance of the year wasn't even performed by living, breathing artists? The Beatles, as a functioning band, stopped existing FORTY years ago.
What's even more telling than their wins is who they were up against: Green Day, The Black Crowes, and Pearl Jam. I guess The Foo Fighters took this year off… Somehow, all these bands seem even more passé than their predecessors.
As I've said before, rock music is already struggling under the weight of old, white men, celebrated for their tainted legacies. Other genres continue to innovate and expand. Pop is shifting with cultural landscapes, bringing in fresh voices and perspectives. Country music is undergoing a renaissance, blending traditional storytelling with contemporary approaches and diversifying its stars. Even electronic music, once an outsider genre, now has a tight hold on the mainstream market. These genres are still growing because they're willing to embrace the present, while rock, at least in the industry's eyes, remains preserved like a mummy.
Of course, it wasn't as dismal for other categories. For once, women came out on top (despite Chris Brown's nomination—another essay for another time). Chappell Roan, St. Vincent, and Beyoncé all took home well-deserved wins, showing that some corners of the industry are evolving. Roan even called out the music business in her speech—and instead of being booed and labeled "ungrateful" like Fiona Apple was in 1997, she was applauded.
Personally, I would've liked to see Kim Gordon or Fontaines D.C. take home an award just for shits and giggles. Not that Fontaines D.C. needs to worry—judging by the usual rock nominees, they have another 50 years of nominations ahead of them. At the rate things are going, they'll win Best Rock Album in 2074 (beating out Keith Richards who will still be alive).
As a rock musician myself, I recognize that the genre is struggling to stay relevant in a fast-evolving musical landscape and attention-challenged scrolling culture. But instead of taking risks with different talent, new ideas, and a broader representation of what rock has to offer, the Grammys—and the industry as a whole—would rather let rock rot on the vine. This year's awards only confirmed what's been obvious for a while: rock has become a token category, preserved for nostalgia rather than progress. Maybe it's time to cut it loose from the mainstream, let it reinvent itself, and see what grows in its place.
c u next tuesday.
XX CARRÉ
please comment, share, like, subscribe. It’s not that hard, ffs!
Times change and we change with them or we get left behind. I'm still a Rock guy but I'm definitely not following the cutting edge anymore. I saw Idles last fall and it was a great time so Rock is still breathing at least.
While I agree that Rock is deader than dead in the eyes of the mainstream Top 40 thing, Rock music and all its multitude of genres and sub-genres from all ranges of artists and bands, is alive and thriving and still kicking. Albeit, below the mainstream radar of Jo Schmo fan who may only listen to the same bands from 10-20-30-40 years ago when they were in high school. And that's not a band thing. What is bad is saying that the genre is dead and buried just because you don't know where to look.
And I may be in the minority here in the fandom, but I don't need an awards show and accolades or a "hall of fame" to validate my favorite bands' art and music. Sure, it's nice and a badge of success (career-wise & financially) to be thrust into the mainstream and loved by more people. But is that really the goalpost to strive for? In my maybe naive and yet cynically jaded outlook, I'd think the art & impact means more than just some award or trophy.
When it comes to stuff like this...I always go back to what Eddie Vedder said when Pearl Jam won "Best Hard Rock Performance" at the 1996 Grammys: "I don't know what this means. I don't think it means anything."